Posts Tagged ‘DMK’

Godse and Dravidian leaders: Very often the DK-protagonists[1], Communist and the like just blurt out that that RSS killed Gandhi[2]. We do not know why they remember very often or like Godse (1910-1949) like this. Now, Karunananidhi cries that “the killers of Gandhi should not come to power” right inside the TN Legislative Assembly. “The sinners of Gandhi-killers should not come to power again. Again one Ayodhya, one Rama Ratha, journey of Advani and such things happen, the country would become a jungle“[3]. “Another Ayodhya or Rathyatra by BJP’s L.K. Advani would turn the nation into a grave,” he said. UPA allies should ensure that the “followers of killers of Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation, should not rule the land,” he told the Tamil Nadu assembly[4]. This way he responds to the Communists and others who raised the issue of price rise! Why this crack-pot again and again target Rama?

DMK and BJP: We have to deal with all the points raised by the CM in the Assembly, as every citizen has a right to discuss about what C. M talks officially in the assembly. How he was hobnobbing with the Gandhi-killers for five years (1996-2001) without shame, disgrace or mortification? At that time what he was doing? Even T. R. Balu was hobnobbing with BJP-RSS volunteers for his Central Madras Constituency election.

His anti-BJP tirade could not have been made right inside the Assembly, as it is not Panagal Park or Mayilai Mangollai to talk in Tamil anything he likes.

When Murasoli Maran was proposed as Minister, nationalists raised questions, as he had been anti-nationalist and proven ideologist of Tamil separatist movement[5]. Was was writing in “Murasoli”, the DMLK mouth-piece arguing for “Dravidasthan”. He also recorded in his introduction that Karinanidhi encouraged him to write and accommodated in the paper. However, he assured BJP leaders that hereafter, he would not talk anything against nation, as he would become a “Central Minister”!

The same thing happened with PMK and MDMK. The PMK again surrendered and agreed to bury all its ideologies of separatism, self-determination and LTTE support. In fact, it had carefully withdrawn all its anti-Indian books, booklets and propaganda literature.

As for as MDMK was concerned, Vaiko never minced his words for his sympathy and ideological support to and for LTTE or trans-territorial Tamil movement[6]. So he decided to keep outside the ministry and support.

Dravidian leaders sand Mahathma Gandhi: The Dravidian leaders of all sorts had / have been totally against Mahathma Gandhi. They had scant regard for him and talked and wrote disrespecting him in their propagandist literature and papers[7]. EVR, Annadurai and Karunanidhi have been very much against Mahathma Gandhi and they always used to talk in a very scurrilous, derogatory and debasing manner with sarcasm and ridicule. The way in which they talk in Tamil could be understood the real inner meaning only by the Tamil-knowing people. Just remember how Karunanidhi asked about Rama with his arrogant sarcasm, malicious derision and blasphemous mock with his body language. Thousand times more derogatory attitude would be there when they talked during 1940s. They used to address him as “Gandhiyar”, “Parppana adigoli”, “Varnashrama vithagar” and such words and expressions in a scornful way.

Karunanidhi’s official involvements in murders and assassination, acquitted later: People generally forget the recent past. In how many murders and assassination, Karunanidhi was officially involved?

 In fact, people, particularly, the non-Tanilnadu citizens know very well that he was one of the accused in the Indira Gandhi attempted murder along with 6 others in 1969. Indira Gandhi gave relief to him by withdrawing the case.

 He has been also under the suspicion of assassination Rajiv Gandhi, as he was / is having links with LTTE. Even when Priyanka met Nalini one of the offenders and undergoing punishment in Vellore jail, she was asking as to any political parties were involved in the assassination plot of his father?

 He was also involved in the cold-blooded murder of the Tiruchendur temple priest and people might have forgotten the Justice Paul Commission Report. The report itself was made disappeared ad the Judge made kept quite.

Karunanidhi and Commissions: Karunanidhi has always been a man of two faces, many tongues. He keeps harping publicly that he is willing to face any inquiry against him. But when an inquiry commission is instituted, he always runs away from it. He tried to run away from the Justice Sarkaria Commission constituted to inquire into corruption charges against him. Another example is the case where the Justice Paul Commission Report was stolen. A case was registered and in this connection in the Madras High Court his attitude of non-cooperation was heard by Justice Singaravelu. Karunanidhi, the fourth accused in the case, refused to cooperate. In fact, the learned Judge observed that “Even if the 4th accused is brought to Court through some coercive steps, it would be futile and the proposed remedy would only aggravate the malady…”

How sins are different? But, now right inside the TN Assembly, he talks about the so-called killers of Gandhi. Nathuram Godse was already hanged for killing the Gandhi. But can he absolve from the above sins? Though, with his power and manipulations, he has covered up, how the facts could be erased from the minds of TN people or Indians?

Karunanidhi and Terrorism[8]: In 1976, Gandhi’s federal government dismissed Karunanidhi’s government on the charges of corruption. A year later, MGR won local elections and sent Karunanidhi into political wilderness until MGR’s death in 1987.

After a year of direct rule by the federal government, the DMK party regained power in Tamil Nadu in 1989. Two years later the federal government dismissed Karunanidhi for a second time, accusing him of not doing enough to crack down on the Tamil Tigers in his state.

Further, the Jain Commission said, the LTTE was getting its supplies, including arms, ammunition, explosives, fuel and other essential items from Tamil Nadu to continue its fight against the IPKF that too with the support of the DMK Government, State Administration and connivance of the law enforcement agencies.

The report said that soon after the DMK Government took over the reins of power in Tamil Nadu, “the LTTE slowly began to consolidate itself in the State and their clandestine activities, heretofore dormant, became more and more pronounced. All the activities of the LTTE at this stage towards resource mobilisation, propaganda and treatment of their wounded cadres, had taken an anti-national dimension.”

The Commission noted the visit of the then DMK MP, Mr. V. Gopalaswamy, MP (DMK) to Northern Sri Lanka and his reported meeting with Prabhakaran between February 8, 1989, and March 3, 1989.

“This visit by Mr. V. Gopalaswamy, and the manner in which this entire episode was dealt with by the DMK party sent clear signals to the pro-LTTE anti-IPKF elements in the State as well as LTTE itself that the newly-elected Government would not resort to any drastic action against such elements; on the other hand, the impression that the entire episode created was that pro-LTTE gestures, even if they were illegal, would be tolerated by the Government.”

The Commission’s report said the then Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, was keen that “some satisfactory solution be arrived at with the LTTE so that the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord could be implemented in letter and spirit. He discussed this concern with Mr. Karunanidhi and sought his assistance.” After Mr. V. P. Singh became the Prime Minister on December 2, 1989, it was spelt out that if no solution came, India would no longer give any military or monetary help to any of the groups, nor allow its mainland to be used for militant activities. “The LTTE remained adamant during their parleys with Mr. Karunanidhi, and continued to demand the formation of Eelam,” the report noted.

The interim report said that credible reports existed of “active connivance of some DMK leaders with the LTTE. The LTTE was in continuous interaction with Mr. Karunanidhi, primarily to ensure that their activities continue unhindered even after the Padmanabha killing.” The ATR “noted” the observation of the Commission that there was a nexus between the LTTE and the ULFA and their combined endeavours in Tamil Nadu had also been confirmed.

The Commission’s report ponders over questions of aid to the LTTE in the killing of Rajiv Gandhi. “Were there other forces behind the LTTE involved in the conspiracy for the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi? These are questions requiring a deep and anxious probe,” the report said referring to conspiratorial aspects which were yet to be dealt with by the one-man probe panel.

Soon after the DMK Government took over the reins of power in Tamil Nadu, the LTTE slowly began to consolidate itself in the State. During 1990, a growing nexus between the LTTE and DMK and its repercussions on the local law enforcement machinery were discernible. The assassination of EPRLF leader K. Padmanabha and others at Madras on 19th June 1990 was a shocking reminder of the impunity with which the LTTE could operate in India.

The case assumes significance due to the fact that striking similarities were found in the Padmanabha assassination and the case relating to the assassination of Shri Rajiv Gandhi. It can, therefore, be safely concluded that the growing connivance of the DMK Government with the LTTE having been brought to the knowledge of the National Front Government, effective steps were not taken by the Central government to check it, whatever may be the reasons.

From the evaluation of the material, the conclusion is irresistible that there was tacit support to the LTTE by Shri M. Karunanidhi and his Government and law enforcement agencies.

The charges, put together as long quotations from the report, include: that the DMK provided a safe sanctuary for the LTTE cadres and activists, it gave advice, active assistance, finance and security cover to LTTE operations, and that the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi would not have been possible the way it happened without the nexus between the LTTE and the DMK, a nexus which started a chain of events which led to the survival and growth of the LTTE in Tamil Nadu long after the Government of India’s attitude had changed towards the LTTE and hostilities had broken out between the Indian Peace Keeping Force and the LTTE in Sri Lanka, and finally that the DMK leader and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, Mr. M. Karunanidhi, had “himself been instrumental in ensuring that things went smoothly for LTTE” and that the cadres of the LTTE had little fear of the security agencies in India “thanks to the patronage of the DMK Government”.

Mahathma Gandhi and Karunanidhi: Karunanidhi’s Tamil usage would very caustic, sarcastic and hurting with double-meaning. That too when he talks with vengeance, hatred and attacking mood, his Tamil would be very very sharp and killing. He has been capable of converting a good word into a bad or even vulgar word in Tamil connotation. He never cared for Gandhi or respected Gandhi. He even does not want to call his name “Mahathma Gandhi” and changed his name as “Uttamar Gandhi” when the name of Nungambakkam Road was changed to Mahathma Gandhi Road , he ordered that it should be ” Uttamar Gandhi Road “. Such has been his love, respect and what not for “the Father of Nation”, but now he talks about the killers of Gandhi!

Dr. Subramanian Swamy[9], President of the Janata Party has said: ?It is abominable for Priyaranjan Das Munshi to compare Karunanidhi with the Father of Our Nation. Karunanidhi is the anti-thesis?in letter and spirit?of Mahatma Gandhi. Karunanidhi was a primary accused in the murder case relating to the beastly attack on Smt. Indira Gandhi during her visit to Madurai in 1979. Moreover following the indictment by the Jain Commission, the Multi-disciplinary Investigation Team and the CBI initially viewed Karunanidhi as a prime suspect in the murder of Rajiv Gandhi?.

Killing of many Tamil leaders and the nexus: The LTTE assassinators have been the DK-sympathisers, they have been maintaining close relations with the DK-DMK-PMK-MDMK and other anti-Indian political parties (all TNLA, TNMK, and such other splinter groups). So we can always say like Karunanidhi, the killers of so-many Tamil leaders have been the DK-DMK-PMK-MDMK and other anti-Indian political parties. In fact, Tamils themselves know very well how the liberal, democratic and reasonable Tamil leaders were hunted and killed mercilessly.

[6] V. Kopalswamy has been very open in his Parliamentary debates also. The Communists used daunt him to come out with views on “nation” and “country” and so on. Thus, he got exposed about his anti-national ideology.

Alleged conversion of Vaiko to Christianity, the revelation of controversial evangelist Mohan Lazarus and denial by the Periyarist V. Gopalsamy!

Murderers, dupers and unbelievers converted to Christianity!: Many Christian pastors have been accused of forcefully converting people of other faith, sometimes with stories of the eternal fire of damnation and sometimes with the lure of freebies[1]. But what came as a shock to many was the news of MDMK chief Vaiko’s conversion to Christianity, thus reported Asianet Newsable[2]. But, the reality has been none bothered about it, as Indians know the religious deceptions, pious frauds and divine scams have been going on behind such propaganda. As for as people of Tamilnadu are concerned, they know very well popular and notorious ones like A. V. M. Rajan[3] to Auto Shankar[4] (1954-1995) were converted to Christianity. Actually, Rajan was converted reportedly, as he was having some financial problems. As for as Auto Shankar is concerned, it is well knon that he was a hard-core criminal, rapist and killer of several women, thus, he was hanged. Ironically, the Christians caught hold of him before hanging, converted and promised heaven! It is not known, as to whether the inhuman murderer had gone to hell or “Christian heaven”! In any case, the conversion has not been any grace or honour brought to them or to their religion Christianity.

The conversion news coming out through Social media and media also: Now, news has come out in the mdia explicitly that Vaiko has been converted to Christianity and it has been revealed by one evangelist Mohan C. Lazarus. The videos revealing the conversion and Vaiko attending midnight mass and appreciating Christianiy like a preacher quoting Biblical verses have been in circulation for the last two weeks. Therefore, it was neccecitated Vaiko to clarify his position. The evangelist has been controversial with his rude way of criticizing Modi and ruling BJP. In vernacular media, his controversial acts have also been reported, but, he denied. Now, also, no secularist or Dravidian ideologist has come forward to criticize, analyze or condemn the conversion, alleged conversion, denial etc., in the context.

Mohan C Lazarus declares that Vaiko has been converted and he is a Christian!: Vaiyapuri Gopalsamy, also known as Vaiko is the founder and General Secretary of the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK), a political party active mainly in the state of Tamil Nadu. The claim of Vaiko converting to Christianity was first made by one of Tamil Nadu’s prominent evangelists Mohan C Lazarus. He also claimed in a video that is being widely circulated on social media that Vaiko was reading the Bible twice a day and regularly visits the Church along with his family. They have been baptized. Lazarus also said that Vaiko’s entire family had converted to Christianity. “His daughter and son-in-law are Christians. They are in the US, and every Sunday, they do the service of God. His wife is a Christian. Since he is in public life, he is not able to announce his new faith. He told me that he was reading Bible two times a day and asked me how to pray and I taught him,” Lazarus claimed in the video[5]. He could have produced the baptism certificate issued for Vaiko.

Can any evangelist declare that any Dravidian leader has been converted and become a Christian?: Responding to a recent video of Lazarus, in which he states that Vaiko and his family have undergone baptism and converted to Christianity, MDMK deputy general secretary Mallai Sathya said that Vaiko has not made any announcement of getting converted into Christianity[6]. How then, Lazarus could declare so openly? Speaking to News Today, he said that Vaiko is a secular leader, who is genuinely interested in knowing about all religions. “He reads Quran, Bible and Bhagavad Gita to know about them and gain knowledge. This does not mean that he has converted to one particular religion. He is an atheist leader and will continue to be so,” he added[7]. Sathya said that people use his name for their own benefits and we do not take this seriously. ‘We cannot go behind everyone who uses Vaiko’s name,’ he added. According to Lazarus, Vaiko’s daughter and son in law who live in US are engaged in Christian evangelist work.

Vaiko’s reply has not been straight to deny: However, Vaiko has refuted Lazarus’ claims, saying that he hasn’t converted. “I am not a Christian. I respect all religions and my daughter-in-law has a pooja room in which you can see images of all Gods,” he told The Hindu. “It was a result of his over-enthusiasm. It’s me and my brother who regularly contribute to the maintenance of the Vinayagar temple in my village,” he further said. He need not explain in this way apologetically, instead of refuting directly. Vaiko said that he had taken up the issue with Lazarus himself as such statements could have serious consequences[8]. He clarified that his daughter had married a Christian and there was no truth in the claim of Mr. Lazarus about others[9]. In Tamil media, he reportedly said that the speech of Lazarus would affect the political condition of the southern districts. So can Vaiko claim that even after becoming a Christian, instead of telling about her, why he says, that, . “……….my daughter-in-law has a pooja room in which you can see images of all Gods,”? Vaiko has been an open supporter of LTTE and had also made a trip to Eelam at the height of the LTTE’s war with Sri Lankan Army which has landed him into a lot of trouble over the years. He was arrested in 2010 for a sedition case filed by DMK. The crypto Christians are as dangerous as the false evangelists spreading satanic news and corrupting the Indian society.

Vaiko’s pro-Christian activities and support: In July 2017, Vaiko led MDMK and PMK objected to keeping engraved Bhagawat Gita alongwith the wooden statue of Abdul Kalam playing veena in Kalam Memorial constructed by the Defense Research and Development Agency[10]. Vaiko insisted that Gita should be replaced with Tirukkural. Ironically giving all details, Deepak Aswale concludes that it seems the controversy over communal politics and Vaiko is certainly not coming to end[11]. Vaiko had not only brought a private member’s bill in parliament to give reservation for Dalit Christians[12], but also been campaining for the cause[13]. With his collegue Thiruma also he has bee doing that, though, legally, it is not possible[14]. Thus, knowingly why he has bee doing such propaganda has been intriguing. Here, the double-game of all the Christian missionaries, dalit groups, secular politicians, atheist grups etc., as such reservation is legally impossible, as the Presidential Order 1950 is meant for Hindus.

[3] His real name is Shanmugasundaram of Pudukottai. Rajan later became a full time Christian preacher since 1988 and since then has stopped acting in movies and dramas. His wife Pushpalatha is a Catholic by birth. Following Rajan’s conversion, his family too is serving full time Ministry.

[4] Shankar and his gang, consisting of his younger brother Auto Mohan and associates Eldin and Shivaji, as well as Jayavelu, Rajaraman, Ravi, Palani and Paramasivam, were found guilty of six murders, committed over a period of two years in 1988–1989. Shankar’s trial completed by the Chengalpattu sessions court He was sentenced to death along with two of his associates, Eldin and Shivaji, on May 31, 1991. Auto Shankar was hanged in Salem Central Prison.

The politics of burning effigies in 2016 by the Congress cons, Dravidian dons and JNU junkies!

Dravidar Kazhagam’s racial approach continues even in 2016: The misguided Dravidar Kazhagam, of various banners still, believes in Aryan-Dravidian racial hypotheses and theories” and work emotionally with raid radicalism. The day after Dussera was celebrated with the burning of effigies of King Raavan in many parts of the country on 12-10-2016, as announced, about 40 members of the Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam [TPDK] landed at the Sanskrit College at Mylapore in Chennai on 13-10-2016 Wednesday to burn effigies of Ram, Sita and Lakshmanan[1]. The group had originally planned to hold the event outside the Madras Sanskrit College of Chennai to protest against the institution’s version of the Ramayana, but it was later shifted to a spot about a kilometre away due to police intervention[2]. While 11 of them were remanded under Section 285 of Indian Penal Code, 12 members of a Hindu group were detained near Sanskrit college in Mylapore[3]. Thus, the media differed in reporting the event.

PDK’s attempt to hold Ravan Leela flops[4]: Deccan Chronicle reported wth this caption. The attempt by Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam members to celebrate the Ravan leela deifying the demon king and projecting him as Dravidian stalwart, while belittling Lord Ram, turned into a fiasco with the police taking 55 persons of PDK into custody on Wednesday. Even before the members could assemble and burn an effigy in front of Sanskrit College, Mylapore, in the city on Wednesday evening, the police pre-empted their move and arrested 55 persons. The PDK had announced to stage Ravan leela as the outfit believed that Ravan was a Dravidian and burning his image during Dusshera celebrations in many parts of India amounted to “mocking” the Dravidians. “This is only a bid to stoke controversy and is intended to insult the Hindu gods and hurt the sentiments of the believers,” Hindu Makkal Katchi state president Arjun Sampath said reacting to the development. The staunch Hindu outfit has demanded the police to detain the PDK members under NSA and prevent such incidents in future. “The PDK is taking things a bit too far. The attempt to hold Ravan leela is an assault on our culture and it is highly condemnable,” Mr Sampath said[5].

Why Ravan leela? – the racist question asked by modernists!: The pro-Muslim media “Scroll.in” reported differently. This was the Periyarist group’s answer to Ram Leela – Ravanan Leela to demonstrate their opposition to the Ram Leela celebrations that depict the victory of King Ram over Raavan, who, according to Indian mythology, had kidnapped Ram’s wife Sita[6]. Amidst tight security, and all efforts of the police to stall the event, the members of the fringe group did manage to burn a few effigies, including that of Lord Ram[7]. Kumaran / Tinker Kumaron, a member of the TDPK said, “Every year, in North India, Ram Leela is celebrated by burning effigies of Raavan, This is being done to insult South Indians. We consider Raavan to be a Dravidian….As per our plan we broke the police chain around us and burned the effigy. 11 persons who were involved in burning effigies have been remanded by police.”

Why is the President participating in Ram leela programme?: Speaking to The Hindu[8], G. Ramakrishnan, general secretary, Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam, said that the act was a reaction to the celebration of Ram Leela as a part of Dusshera celebrations across North India, a festival in which the effigy of mythological character Ravanan is set on fire symbolically to represent victory of Lord Ram over Ravanan. “To us, Ramayana, though a mythological story, was a Aryan-Dravidian conflict where Lord Ram was shown to have won against Ravanan, who we consider as a Dravidian. The epic represents Ram as a God and Ravanan as a monster. This is the basis of our opposition,” he said. Criticising the recent celebrations at the Red Fort lawns, which was attended by several high-profile dignitaries including President Pranab Mukherjee, and Congress president Sonia Gandhi, Ramakrishnan wondered if India really was a secular country. “Why is the President participating in such a programme? He is the president to whole of India,” he said. It is evident that these people are behaving in this way, knowing the truth that the whole country has been celebrating for many years. Even hundreds years back, it was celebrated in Asfganistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and other countries.

Belief in race, racism and racialism: Condemning Ramayana’s ‘racist portrayal’ of ‘Dravidians as demons’, the TPDK said that the Ravanan Leela was their way of protesting against Hindu cultural hegemony. “It does not matter that ‘Ram Leela’ is not celebrated in Tamil Nadu. In Delhi, effigies of Ravanan and his two brothers are burnt, we believe that they are Dravidians and burning their effigies is mocking us. So to stop that, we have decided to celebrate ‘Ravana Leela’ in which we will be burning the effigies of Ram, Sita and Lakshman,” S Kumaran, another TDPL leader had told TNM earlier. He also added that they had written a letter to Prime Minister asking him to stop Ram Leela in Delhi but they did not get any response from his office. “It is clearly proven once again that the rulers of India will never care to respect the feelings of the Southerners,” said the group. “If they have cared so, then they would not have ventured to burn the effigies of the three choicest heroes of the Dravidian race in the guise of honouring a hero of religious epic.” Kumaron said that this protest against Ram Leela celebrations gathered momentum in 1974, when the group sent a letter to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi demanding a stop to the festivities. But at that time too, they received no reply. Over the next few decades, there have been at least three instances when the group has burnt effigies of Ram, and and been arrested for this.

Splinter groups playing dangerous games: Veeramani and “Viduthalai” Rajendran had a break and Rajendran started “The Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam” in 2012, claiming that they would follow the teachings of social activist and politician EV Ramaswami Naicker or Periyar, who had also questioned the portrayal of Raavan in the popular version of the Ramayana. As reported in Outlook, some of the questions posed by Periyar were, “Isn’t it true that Ravaan abducted Sita as an honourable revenge for the insult heaped upon his sister? Isn’t it a Brahminical ploy to give the colour of lust to a most honourable kidnapping?” The DK spinter groups have always been attacking the soft target – the Brahmins! They cruelly cut a poor Brahmin at West Mambalam some years ago with aruval (study sword), and another Brahmin in Mylapore last year (April 2015)[9].

Splinter DK groups attack Brahmins following the path of Periyar: MT Saju writes that in the 1970s too, Periyarists conducted Ravanan Leelas. He reminds us that after Periyar died, his wife Maniyammai burnt the effigy of Ram at Periyar Thidal in 1974[10]. But since then, it has not been a popular event. Thus, for some reason, some people want to create ruckus now. Dravidian movement analyst K Thirunavukarrasu said that this anti-Ram sentiment has existed since the beginning of the Dravidian movement in the 1920s. The 1940s saw the publication of works such as Raavana Kaviyam (Raavana Epic) by Pulavar Kuzhandhai and Iranyan Allathu Inayatra Veeran(Hiranya or the Unparalleled Warrior) by Bharatidasan, which eulogised the characters Raavan and Hiranyakashyap, who had been depicted as asuras in popular versions of Indian mythological stories. “The asurashave been depicted in these stories in a manner that denigrates Dravidians,” said Thirunavukarrasu. As Periyar used to say, “If you see a snake and Brahmin, leave snake but kill Brahmin”, these goons are following such bloody method.

Dravidian King Ravana was a Brahmin: The atheist Dravidian ideologists do not believe Puranas, yet, they believe them for their myth-making. As they believe Aryan-Dravidian race theories, at one side they claim that Ravana was a Brahmin! “The intention of the Dravidian movement is to oppose the depiction of Dravidas as asuras in all these plays.” Tamil writer D Ravikumar said that according to the version of the Ramayana written by medieval Tamil poet Kambar, Raavan was not a Dravidian King but a Brahmin. “If you look at this from the lens of Kambar’s Ramayana, it is hard to say how he came to be associated with Dravidian identity,” said Ravikumar. Ravikumar said that around the 1960s, Tamil Nadu politics was based on antagonism towards North India, Brahminism, Aryans and Hindi. The protest against Ram Leelas rode on this sentiment, he said. But in the 1970s and 1980s, the issue became irrelevant. When the main parties in power were all Dravidian parties, it was no longer a vote-catching subject. “Now, this has been revived by some groups after the BJP has come to power,” said Ravikumar. “Raavan acts as an anti-BJP symbol. But we don’t know how successful it will be.”

Karunanidhi playing Ravana (1998): On October 1, 1998, Anoor Jagadeesan, president of PDK and 16 others were arrested when they tried to burn the effigies of Rama and Lakshmana in Chennai[11]. On October 18, 1998, Karunanidhi asserted that[12], “….if you insult Ravana, you are insulting me”. In Ramasethu issue also, he passed remarks asking “In which engineering college Rama studied” (so that he could build a bridge). Even, Kamal Hasan also used to utter that he came from Ravan geneology or something like that!

Ilangeswaran vs Ravana Leela: R. S. Manohar (1925-2006) used to portray all Asuras as heroes – Surapadman, Sisupalan, Narakasuran, Indrajit, Sukrachariyar etc., in his characteristic projection in his dramas, which were successful in 1970-80s. He too projected Ravana as “Ilankeswaran”, the Lord of Lanka, but, not the Dravidian way of contempt, hatred and blasphemy. In fact, he followed the Puranic narration and other hagiographical details. Understandably, he was never supported or honoured by the Dravidian leaders or even Periyar for his donning Asuras! And now, the fringe elements have started the old game, when the Dravidian CM, that too, a lady has been ailing in hospital.

Modi effigy burned by the Congress and JNU students[13]: A group of students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) on 11-10-2016 Tuesday burnt the effigy of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, BJP chief chief Amit Shah, Mahatma Gandhi’s killer Nathuram Godse and others to mark the “victory of truth over falsehood” on the occasion of Dussehra. Members of the Congress-backed National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) on Tuesday night celebrated Dussehra by burning the effigy of Modi and others to protest against the growing interference of the Centre in universities and attacks on Dalits.“We celebrated the victory of truth over falsehood in a modern and democratic country by burning effigies. For us Modi and RSS are symbol of untruth,” said Sunny Diman, an NSUI member[14]. So, the Congress party too has taken such method of politics of burning effigies exploiting the occasion of “Viyayadasami”. Ironically, the Congress leaders have been questioning the successful surgical operations on these days at one side and indulging in such cheap and vulgar activities at another side.

Earlier, Nandi posted in WordPress.com, in which he has made several mistakes. After pointing out (see below), now, he is coning out here with corrections made without acknowledging.

I am posting the following as a reply to Nandi”s posting appearing here:

My attention is drawn to your posting in WordPress.com.

I offer my comments to your post:

“India was an island nation surrounded by seas hence it had the name நாவலந்தீவு”.

Is to so? Kindly tell me, where the expression “நாவலந்தீவு” is found in the ancient Tamil literature or “Sangam” literature?

“In such a scenario to claim that a Land Bridge built 1,750.000 years ago when no human being had inhabited the Earth”

In haste, you are mentioning as 1,750 years (1,750.000 = 1750).

Paula Richman wrote a book titled “Many Ramayanas” Yes the question before us is to accept which Ramayana as true story?.

You claimed youself as a rationalist / atheist etc. Then, you have to be careful in quoting from secondary sources, because, non-Hindus or anti-Hindus can write anything and quoting such biased ideas make you unbecoming of a “rationalist / atheist”. You should have read H. D. Sankalia also before jumping into the so-called “debate”.

Your mention about Jain / Buddha Ramayanas: As Ramayana has become so popular, even Jains and Buddhists had to imitate Ramayana by changing the story, just like Kulandai. Therefore, there is nothing new in it. As a researcher or scholar or historian, you have to demythologize and find out the truth, instead of relying upon “such myth on myth”, straightaway.

[The biblical Adam and Eve’s story and its resemblance could also be taken note of] Sita becoming a monket after eating a fruit: This shows that either you have not read the story properly or misquoting or rather drawing wrong parallel with the biblical Adam and Eve (don’t try to escape by telling that I am a rationalist and all). I do not know as to whether Eve became monkey to have such forceful comparison!

You furthering the above story: Here, you are perhaps nearing the biblical fables, as Jesus also reportedly married to May Magdelene. Perhaps, you decided to not stretch it.

According to Thais, Hanuman had many affairs and children: Naturally, if the wishes are horses, even blind can fly. Why Thais, even Annba did it. As you are a rationalist and atheist, you quote all these things, so enjoy.

Anna’s inconclusive debate on Kamba Ramayanam: “Navalar Somasundara Bharathiar and சொல்லின் செல்வர் R.P.Sethu Pillai debated with Anna and openly admitted they have lost the debate. This debate in Tamil Book “Let Fire Spread” தீபரவட்டும் wants to illuminate Tamil hearts by symbolically burning Kamba ramayanam. Pulavar Kuzhanthai wrote இராவண காவியம் . Ravana Kavyam can be considered as Dravidian version of Ramayanam”.No, they were ashamed of the perversity and vulgarity erupted in the name of literary flow and hanged their heads. Any Tamil knowing or reading person would hang his head after reading as it is just like “yellow journalism” circulated under the “Dravidian” banner, that too, coming from Anna, wjo became Chief Minister of Tamilnadu taking oath under the Indian Constitution, that has been written by Ambedkar. Anyway, the facts are as follows:

N The so called debate was held in the auditorium ofLaw
College, Madras on 09-02-1943 under Ramachandra Chettiyar.

N Anna started speaking and took more than one and half hours leaving no time to others.

N Pointing out the falsehood in his speech, R. P. Sethu Pillai openly spoke about his weakness in the argument. In fact, re ridiculed Anna for quoting from “Northern Nehru”, being a “Nakkiran” (one who always finds fault with others). Regretting that he could not speak for long time, he wound up his speech within ten minutes. He dared him that he would even come to Kanchipuram for another debate on the subject matter, if he would invite him.

N Ezattu Adigal, who followed him, was asked to cut short his speech within five minutes.

N Then Srinivasan started speaking, but he was prevented from speaking, as the DK activists created a riot-like condition. He had to stop his speech, because of the pandemonium created by them.

N But, Anna was given a chance to speak again!

N So that was the debate conducted with “freedom of speech” and respect for speakers!

N However, winding up, C. M. Ramachandra Chetti concluded that he could not give his opinion, as the debate had been inconclusive.

The main point discussed was as to whether Ravana was an Aryan or Dravidian. Thus, the first debate had been the most undemocratic conducted under controlled conditions with rioters.

The second debate was conducted on 14-03-1943 at Devanga Padasalai, Sevvaipettai,
Salem. Salem College A. Ramasamy presided over Anna and Somasundara Bharathi spoke.

N Anna spoke as usual taking full time.

N Somasundara Bharathi pointed out that Anna spoke as an orator with brimming emotion not as a debater. He then, however brought out his points refuting Anna;s talk.

N He left, as his speech was over and moreover, he had to catch his train, as plannede by the organizers.

N But, after his departure, Anna was given a chance and he stressed upon Ravana’s race and concluded with the demand of burning “scriptures of Aryans”.

N A. Ramasamy, though did not gave any result about the debate, he pointed out that there was “vulgarity” in Kamba Ramayanam.

In any case, such diverted reference has nothing to do with the “Ramar’s Palam”.

“The question before us which of these versions is based on true historical facts. These are not days where everyone will accept anything with blind faith. If you place new facts to reopen a settled issue in history, you should place facts and prove it”.

Yes, yes. Nowadays, everybody can get information easily and they decide about truth behind it. Even in those days (when Anna debated), the other scholars were not allowed to speak or threatened with dire consequences. In other words, they used their own type of terrorism in those days. Now, let us see, how truth is faced.

“Let us examine the falsehoods one by one. We from the Dravidian Movement are atheists but not Ravana; all know that Ravana as per epics is a devotee of Lord Siva. The doubt which arises to me is why should a reincarnation of God perform superhuman deeds to impress demigods? Does it mean that Demigods are more powerful than the Original God on reincarnation?”

Interestingly, the answer is there in the so-called above debate, as they debated only about the race of Ravana as to whether he was an Aryan or Dravidian! Rationalist or atheist has to deny such myth. Having believed it as a myth, why one should worry about it as to whether it works or not? Without Ramayana myth, there is no Ravana. If Ramayana is myth, Ravana is also a myth. Then, why debate about his “racist credentials”?

“There are many books on Indian Ocean. All these books give us evidences on the continental drift, the submerged lands of the Lemuria, which Tamils prefer to call as the Kumari Kandam”.

Yes, but note again, the western scholars do not believe in such hypotheses. Why them, even Indian eminent historians not only do not accept, but also dub them as myth.

Mr. Nandi Varman, go to Endo-eurasian group and other forums, where Tamil literature is misinterpreted and disrespected. Steve Farmer openly accuses that your friend R. Mathivanan is a foregerer. They go on debate even without knowing the fundamentals of Tamil and Tamil literature. I feel it is better spend your energy there instead of politicizing the issue.